AFAIK, most Free World regulatory regimes follow the US (and the IAEA) in failing to make a clear distinction between experimental/prototype reactors and standard production plants. This was not the case early on in the US in the 1950's and early 60's, when the labs pretty much controlled what they tested and how. That was a period in which we had real technological progress.
How are the test being done now at INL? Is there something short of a full production license? I've heard there is also a shortage of enriched uranium, delaying Natrium for another two years. Why can't they downblend some of their surplus weapons-grade uranium?
MacQuigg, you have more questions than a 3 year old. I assume you are referring to the plan to build the first Nuscale plant at INL. This is not in any real sense prototype testing. It is simply a commercial plant built on federal property, like the Columbia Generating Station at Hanford and SONGS at Camp Pendleton. At best, it is license, then test.
The DOE has totally botched the whole HALEU program. See Centrus Fiasco piece. My understanding is the military is resisting releasing any more weapons grade U. But
apparently, there is a move to do some downblending at Savannah. Based on Savannah's past performance, dont expect much. The real hope is the commercial outfits like Urenco. The IRA gives DOE taxpayer money to buy HALEU, but DOE will probably screw that up as well.
Very true and how these tests are designed is another thing - In the US we design systems and teats based on past failures which is often counter productive - In Canada and Korea they design tests based on FUTURE requirements and thats why the CANDU and APR1400s and soon to be KOR series is light years ahead on the US as we pontificate our past navels
Why can't the tests be done outside the USA?
David,
AFAIK, most Free World regulatory regimes follow the US (and the IAEA) in failing to make a clear distinction between experimental/prototype reactors and standard production plants. This was not the case early on in the US in the 1950's and early 60's, when the labs pretty much controlled what they tested and how. That was a period in which we had real technological progress.
How are the test being done now at INL? Is there something short of a full production license? I've heard there is also a shortage of enriched uranium, delaying Natrium for another two years. Why can't they downblend some of their surplus weapons-grade uranium?
MacQuigg, you have more questions than a 3 year old. I assume you are referring to the plan to build the first Nuscale plant at INL. This is not in any real sense prototype testing. It is simply a commercial plant built on federal property, like the Columbia Generating Station at Hanford and SONGS at Camp Pendleton. At best, it is license, then test.
The DOE has totally botched the whole HALEU program. See Centrus Fiasco piece. My understanding is the military is resisting releasing any more weapons grade U. But
apparently, there is a move to do some downblending at Savannah. Based on Savannah's past performance, dont expect much. The real hope is the commercial outfits like Urenco. The IRA gives DOE taxpayer money to buy HALEU, but DOE will probably screw that up as well.
Very true and how these tests are designed is another thing - In the US we design systems and teats based on past failures which is often counter productive - In Canada and Korea they design tests based on FUTURE requirements and thats why the CANDU and APR1400s and soon to be KOR series is light years ahead on the US as we pontificate our past navels
That's because 1) the NRC, via its tactics is anti-nuclear and, 2) it's called commissioning.